Hi Day Day,
So you wonder why I as a very small business person would
support Bernie Sanders for President.
That is a great question.
Because you are new to this country and you have never witnessed a
Presidential election, I am sure you are confused. Many of the English people you work with are
staunch Republicans. Then there are
Democrats which a lot of people are critical of in our area. And then there is Bernie who is considered a
far left socialist. I'm sure you think
that must be really bad. So, I'm sure
you wonder why I, would support a
socialist?
That is really long answer.
First we have to discuss the social issues. These are the issues that really divide the
people. The social issues are the issues
politicians use as tools to destroy their opponent but aren't the real reason
people vote. Abortion is the first
one. We are all opposed to ending the
life of a fetus developing in the mother's womb. This is a tragic happening everyday in America. Every baby deserves to be born into the
world of a loving family. For 30 years
politicians have used this issue to fool the evangelical Christians into voting
for them but they have never done a thing to stop it. I
would have more respect for the pro-life movement if they would give voice to
supporting single moms who carry the burden of bringing an infant to term. The least they could do is make the whole
process of adoption free for the couples who welcome the unwanted child. Bottom line is that the republican party is
all about tax cuts for the wealthy, expanding our military preparation, and
little more. Reagan said he was opposed to abortion but his
wife was not. George H. Bush said he
was opposed to abortion but his wife was not.
George W. Bush, maybe, was a true believer but did nothing. Now Donald Trump says he is opposed to
abortion but everyone knows he's not.
Ask his wife. I don't want to minimize how serious the sanctity of life is to us, but the point is
abortion is not the issue they really care about so don't be fooled.
The other issue is the practice that marriage is between one
woman and one man. Certainly this is
what we believe. In my job I have
attended more than a thousand weddings but have never been asked to photograph
a gay wedding. I know of people who say
they are gay but I don't know them well.
Is it really true they are born with these gay attractions and they
cannot do anything about it? The
consensus of the scientific community seems to lean this way but I don't
know. One time I asked Ler La's brother
Qwei Qwei if there are gay people in the Karen community? He laughed and said, "you mean like a
girl? yes yes....they don't treat them
very well....Sometimes they kill them".
Is this true, Day Day? It's hard
for me to imagine that could be possible.
If that is the case, then we do
need laws to protect them as we do every minority group who is abused. Certainly as a persecuted Karen person you
would support that. The hard part is we
believe the gay lifestyle is sinful.....the same way we believe the adulterous
husband is sinful. It is hard to accept
and tolerate something you know is sinful.
But yet in a democratic society that is what we need to do. So the courts have established protection
for gay people and there is nothing a
politician can do to change it. It is a
constitutional right. But the
Republican party will still bring this up to rally evangelical Christians even
if they can't do anything about it.
So what are the issues that people vote for. I'm sad to say everyone votes from their
wallets. How can I give as little as I must
and at the same time make as much money as I can for myself. Republicans have been pushing tax cuts for
the wealthy since Ron Reagan era beginning in 1980. We
have always called our income tax Progressive Taxation. In other words the more you earned, the
higher percentage of your income was taxed.
In 1980, if you earned 5 to 10,000 you paid just 5 percent of your
income to tax. If you earned 30 to
40,000 you paid 18 percent. If you
earned 200,000 or more you paid 43 percent for income for federal tax. Reagan ran for tax cuts for the wealthy and won
the election. He dropped the top rate
from 43 to 28 percent. Wealthy people
were very happy with Reagan but the deficit spending far outpaced the promise
of more income he promised. George W.
Bush did the same thing reducing the top income rate back down since it had slipped up again under Clinton. Again this move contributed
toward a lot of the deficit spending adding to our national debt but did not generate economic growth.
Deficit spending is a problem. It means the government spends more money
than it takes in. If you or I would do
this we would be bankrupt the first year.
We can't spend more than our income.
But there is a big difference between you and I and the government. First the government never dies. It can accumulate debt and it doesn't need
to pay it back. First it pays interest
to people who invest in Treasury bonds....so the government debt is an
investment for others. In other words
the debt is a loan the government takes on from it's people. One could say it is the same as a loan to
yourself since the government and people are one and the same thing. Plus the government can print money. When they do this the value of the dollar
decreases. We paid for the Vietnam War
by printing lots of money. A house my grandpa
sold in 1970 for 27,000 dollars, sold in 1976 for 54,000, now it is worth
325,000. The economy is still perking
along....the dollar one earns just doesn't buy as much. The minimum wage in 1970 was $1.60 and now
it is 7.50 I think but it should be 10 or 11 I think because of the devaluation
of the dollar.
The theory behind these Tax cuts for wealthy is that given
more money the wealthy would spend it buying all kinds of things which create
jobs for everyone. It was called
building the economy from the top down called trickle down to energize
everyone. One could say this was
partially successful. Reagan expanded
his military spending considerably which did employ some people but most would
say it is largely insignificant. George
W. Bush attempted to same thing but it too was only marginally successful. The reason being is that wealthy people
don't necessary spend their extra money
Therein lies the number one strength of the a socialistic
economy. Rich people rarely make poor
people rich. But poor people always make
Rich people rich. The reason being is
that if you empower the poor they spend every dollar they have and it always
ends up in the hands of those who control the production of goods and services. In economic class we call this the velocity of money. In other words the more money changes hands the more it blesses everyone.
A second reason tax cuts do not necessarily stimulate the
economy is that when one is in business there are all kinds of ways of
minimizing one's income. If one has a
good year as a farmer, he can buy a 100,000 tractor which makes him more
productive and he writes the 100,000
dollars off in one year. A wood worker
can buy better saws and bigger sanders.
If one prospers the first thing on any businessperson's mind is how they
will minimize the tax they need to pay.
So high taxes encourage all kinds of good things such as business
investments, giving to charities or one's church, investing in apartments
providing homes for people, having children, buying one's own home where the interest
is tax deductible, etc. On the other hand if you spend money for
expensive vacations you need to earn 2 dollars for every one you spend because
those expenses are not tax deductible.
So I really appreciate our system as it is or rather the way
it was before President Reagan time. I
worry when I hear republicans talk about wanting a flat tax. In my mind it is another vehicle to place a
greater burden on the poor to pay for the costs of government and shield the
rich who don't give to charity from needing to pay taxes supporting their
lavish lifestyle. Reagan earned 800,000
one year he was president and only gave to charity 6,000. I think that shows you where his priorities
were as president. Progressive Taxation is the heart of a just
society. This is socialist
principle.
Another Socialist principle is that of inheritance taxes. Republicans call this a death tax and they
call it immoral. I don't understand why this is an issue because one can have an
estate of 5 million dollars before you are required to pay inheritance taxes by
the federal government when you die. Not
very many people have estates this large so I am confused by this. In our state Pa we still have a 4.5 percent
inheritance tax when one dies, but at the federal level we have no inheritance
tax unless the estate is larger than 5 million. So why should we care about inheritance or
estate taxes.
I actually want to call this value Biblical Socialism. There is a huge theme that runs through the
whole Bible we call economic justice.
In the old testament it was called year of Jubilee. The land belongs to God and is given to us
as stewards. Since some prosper and some
have hard luck, inequity develops so this land which is God's gift needs to be redistributed
at the end of every 50 years and given back to the original families it was given
to at the beginning of their life in the promised land. I suspect this commandment was rarely obeyed by
Israel. We know this because the prophets continued
to cry out for justice for the poor claiming that if they don't keep the law
they will be destroyed as a nation. It
was prophesied that when the Messiah came he would indeed practice the year of
Jubilee. It is so interesting that when
Jesus began his ministry, the first time he stood up in the synagogue, he read
that very passage from the old testament and then he said today this prophesy
is fulfilled in your hearing. Of course they wanted to stone him right away at the time. But Jesus ministry was all about giving
dignity to the poor. Even the Lord's
prayer includes the line which asks God to forgive us our debts toward him as we
forgive the debts of those who owe us something. This translation is hard for us to accept. We are much more comfortable spiritualizing
that line making it all about sins:
Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us. But the true translation of the passage is
all about money. Jesus knew our love
for money is the great idolatry of all mankind. That's why he told the rich man if he wants
to be saved he needs to sell what he has and give to the poor. Indeed
when he left this earth, sent the Holy Spirit and the Church was birthed, they sold possessions and goods, they
shared with anyone who was in need. ...their possessions and
property and distributed them to everyone, as each one had need. This was the year of Jubilee enacted.
Why is this value
so important? We believe in private
property. We believe when people have
opportunity, build on that opportunity, they prosper
and improve their lives and everyone around them. This is the foundation of the capitalistic system
we practice in this country. As is
natural our enterprises expand. Up
until this point capitalism is wonderful.
But where we go from here is the problem. Where are the limits of growth that keeps a
healthy society. It's like we are all
fish in a big fish bowl. Little fish get
eaten by bigger fish who then get eaten by bigger fish and eventually there is
just one big fish who has to die because there are no more fish. I
suspect a biblical answer to this question is that we are limited by our own
lifespan. In addition the year of
Jubilee which came every 50 years limited the strength of the big fish. 50
years is just a little less than 3 generations. I think this is significant because in
practical terms 3 generations is as long as a family business can be kept in
tact.
I am most familiar with farming. Farming is my mindset from which I understand
the world. It is natural for some
because they work hard, pay attention to detail, or the luck of good weather, to
prosper beyond their neighbor. When
another farm comes up for sale they can purchase it but of course that requires
more help....maybe they can take on employees, or maybe a they have a child who
is now ready to farm. This is model of
farming in the life of my childhood, and the current Amish model of
farming. However, today's corporate model of business has industrialized
farming as well. We are no longer limited by our lifespan or
family help. The machine age has
enabled one to expand enterprises far beyond our human limitations. Tractors and implements are huge making it
possible to farm vast sections of land.
Large chicken or dairy enterprises have grown so large that they depend
on multiple farms to support their enterprises somewhat for feed but primarily for manure disposal. The children of a farmer can bind together
to run a large operation like this successfully into the second generation but
it becomes a huge problem when all the cousins in the third generation want to
have a part in the business. None of the
family can afford to purchase and run this mammoth operation so it needs to be
sold to yet a bigger fish....some corporation buys it with public money on the
stock exchange. What we worked so hard
to create, ends up in nobodies hands with a family of children upset with each
other. This road we are on has taken us
to a difficult place. Either one is
lucky enough to be the child of a trust fund recipient, or you are part of the next generation with no opportunity for ownership except as a nondescript wage
earner in some corporate entity. One hears the echo of Isaiah the prophet saying "Woe to you who add house to house and field to field till no space is left and you live alone in the land". Currently in Lancaster we have a couple of farms in the corporate
stage. but most are in the 2nd generation stage. Entering the third generation stage will be
the challenge in the next 30 years. A
strong socialistic government is critical for the health of our farm lifestyle
but primarily for the well being of our family life together. Breaking up these large farms will restore
opportunity for individuals who want to farm.
With strong zoning laws in place farms can be valued by their potential
earnings in agriculture alone.
Fortunately we do have the Amish as our best example of
Biblical socialism by their self imposed limits of their own operations. Farms are bought and sold frequently with
values based on what that individual farm by itself can produce. Farms are limited in size to what an ordinary
family can do. Older farmers turn their
farm over to their children quickly in their late 40's or early 50's. as they move into the apartment. In the corporate world ownership is in the
hands of stockholders. They hire
managers who manage employees who do the work.
They have no vested interest in the community or neighborhood except the
return they expect for their investment which they buy and sell regularly. In the Biblical Socialized world the
neighborhood, family, means just about everything.
So the year of Jubilee is central to everything I believe
about Christian faith, and politics. I
happen to talk about farming because that is what I am most familiar with. But one could talk about restaurants, retail
stores, health care providers, etc. it all has become different expressions of corporate
structure. I thought about this
yesterday in Philadelphia
where I had my sandwich in a corner deli owned and run by an older couple and
their son. It was simple, good food,
unique character. I sat down with
neighbors from neighborhood who recognized me as a stranger, asked me who I was
and why I was there. I wish I would
have taken a photo because I only thought about it afterward how special that
experience was in contrast to sitting in a strip mall eating at Subway.
So why socialism? We
have come to this place in our history where people don't see a way to get on
the first rung of the ladder. Many
people work at Park
City but no one there
owns anything. All the wealth lies in
the hands of those stockholders in some corporation somewhere far away. How can one feel a sense of ownership when
that is seen as something far beyond their reach.
Conservative Republicans tend to believe government is the
problem and if government would be small,
get out of the way, tax less, then people would have money to be able to
strive for their dreams. The problem is
though, Republicans have not made government smaller. They just have redirected government toward
projects they love to push, namely building up the military. This is why conservative Ron Paul and his
son Rand Paul want to be known as a libertarian because they claim those who
call themselves conservative republicans aren't conservative at all. They say most republicans will continue push
military preparedness and fight wars ultimately bankrupting our country. Interesting that Bernie Sanders as a
socialist would agree with that libertarian view completely.
Ordinarily I would support Ron Paul and Rand Paul whole
heartedly. Our government has meddled in
the affairs of other countries for a long long time. Our track record of success is really
bad. We have destabilizing one country
after another. Our current problem in
the Middle East is just another illustration
of what we have been doing since the Spanish American War in the 19th century. We have to recognize that wars are big
business. Vice President Cheney was an
executive with Halliburton, a military contractor. It is estimated that his company alone made
almost 40 billion dollars on the Iraq war. He really wanted that war and George W.
listened to him. Hillery Clinton pushed the Iraq war as a business opportunity. This is grossly immoral. So the Paul's are exactly correct in wanting
to stop our country from getting involved in foreign countries affairs.
On the other hand a democratic government can play a really
important role in helping limit the powers of the big fish. I believe government has a positive role
protecting weak and vulnerable from the strong and empower the poor to get a foothold in
this world. Minimum wages, safe working
conditions, food and drug regulations,
social security programs, environmental protection programs, public education,
public health clinics, unemployment compensation, are all areas where government plays a role in
protecting weak. These legislative programs have
always been labeled as socialistic, which sounds ungodly, but I wish they would
be viewed as something God's very heart was concerned about from the very
beginning. So I am not a
libertarian. I believe big business
requires government to protect the people.
In this regard they are doing the work of God.
The business community almost universally rejects these
programs because they see it as cutting into their profit margins, but
experience has proved otherwise. When
Henry Ford doubled the wages of his workers he enabled them to buy his cars. Today he is given credit for stimulating the
middle class in our country. In my own small business of renting apartments
at least one third are persons who rely social security to pay their monthly
rent. I often think that indirectly I
am the one who relies on the government check or what some would call
welfare. The whole agricultural industry is blessed by
the food stamp program. Everyone who
employs anyone for less than 16 dollars an hour and one who has a family is
blessed by the income tax credits. This
is a program initiated by President Reagan called work welfare. In a sense it is subsidy to small business
supporting them with employees who raise their families on marginal
incomes. I was excited when our first
family of four was able to pay rent and living expenses on his $9.00 hour
income, buying food with food stamps, and save his income tax credit
check. After 4 years he had accumulated
22,000 in savings. When he moved with
his family to Minnesota
he was able to purchase a house with his savings as his down payment. Since that time I was disappointed when
Republican Gov. Corbett said if a family has more than $5500 in saving they
cannot get food stamps. This took away
any incentive anyone had in saving to buy a home. Now our people are inclined to spend money
on cars rather than lose the food stamp check.
But the point is still strong, whenever we empower the people to have a
vision of what they can become it turns around to bless the people who support
that empowerment many times over.
The biggest reason to support socialism is in the area of
health care costs. When I was in
business we paid the insurance premiums for our employees. Costs were very high. One was reluctant to hire more people
primarily because of medical insurance.
When I take someone for a job interview today and the employer asks me,
"Does he have a family?" I
know exactly what he is thinking. A
single guy costs far less to employ than a worker with a family. On the other hand, if a person has a job and really wants to
change their job, many times they are
locked in because they can't interrupt their health care. Health care is expensive primarily because the inefficiency at the bill collection end.
If I go to the doctor, he writes up a bill 3 times higher than he
expects to receive, the insurance company rewrites the bill according to what
they believe is fair and reimburses the doctor, then the bill comes to me
because I have not yet accumulated expenses to match my $5000 deductible. For this effort each doctor's office needs
to employ extra staff, the insurance company needs to pay staff, advertising,
and the CEO of insurance company apparently earns 2 million a year. For the past 30 years I dreamed of a single
paying provider with a non profit motive....which of course would be a
government health care system. I
wondered why should providing health care be the responsibility of the
employer? In the past 8 years I have sat many many hours
in our public health clinics in Lancaster
with our immigrant community. The
public health providers are wonderful people. I would be happy to patronize
them. Many of our doctors including my personal family Catholic doctor also would dream of a simpler system so they could just
focus on health care. The Private
health care system is destroying our business community. I plead for everyone to help adopt a one
payer socialized system of health care. It's so upsetting going through all the
different medical cards and have the receptionist say we take this card but not
that one. Please make it one card. Sadly
Obama tried but in the end the medical care insurance providers just expanded
the base with a sliding scale payment system based on income, which is an
improvement. 20 million more people have
coverage, but the inefficiencies continue.
Another issue, Day Day, I am sad to say is a historic issue
our country has had with Race. There is
a large segment of our population feel so much hatred toward Obama just because
he is black. I know this is true
primarily because I listen to people talk on Amateur radio from the south and I
hear all the racist things they say. Donald
Troop has become their hero. He can say
the most racist statement and they actually love him for it. He also ridicules Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio
and gets away with it also. I believe
that he ridicules them and people enjoy it because they are also a bit brown. The reason the establishment republicans are
so upset is because they have spent a lot of energy trying to court Spanish and
Black votes and now Donald Troop is redefining the Republican party as a white,
Racist party. We knew this element was
part of the party since Nixon's time but never has it become so blatantly
obvious. My comfort here is that
Donald may be able to use this racism to get the nomination but hopefully will
not give him the national election. You
must know Day Day, as an Asian you are considered white. All nationalities who come to this country
have a hard time assimilating into this country in the first generation. By the second generation every immigrant
nationality has been absorbed and accepted as equals except our
Afro-Americans. When Asian people get
beat up by blacks you must know that the blacks know in one generation your
children will prosper and be successful here in America but the blacks will remain
the last hired and first fired. Sadly
this is true. Bernie Sanders is a most
unusual person because as an American Jew he marched with Blacks for Civil
Rights in the 60's when the South was still enforcing segregation. Blacks have not supported Bernie really well
for reasons I don't understand. There is not one of us who does not have
racist attitudes. Our Karen people are
keenly aware of their own race because they have been the victim race based
genocide. You were born into a people
group exactly like Jesus under Roman occupation. It will be a miracle of God if you can help
your people embrace all people as equally loved by God including your
enemies.
Bernie Sanders will take some criticism for his commitment
to a minimum wage of $15.00 and hour. I agree with Bernie that $15.00 is the minimum
livable wage. You will be surprised that I actually like our
status quo. There seems to be little
difference in lifestyle between our families where the bread winner earns
$11.00 an hour and those who earn $16.00.
The point is that the bread winner who earns $11.00 gets cheaper health
care, more food stamps, and plus income tax credit. As long as they are working they are
golden. Raising the minimum wage to
$15.00 for everyone would reduce almost everyone's benefits to zero. That would please the Republican Party really
well, but the small business owner would be really upset because they really appreciate
the subsidy the government gives their employees. Not all businesses could absorb that kind of
increase and survive. So I think the
most socialistic practice would be to keep the status quo as it is.
Bernie also takes a lot of criticism for his promise to
provide free collage education for every young person in America. It's not a fair criticism from those who
wanted to go to war in Iraq because Bernie's promise to young people would represent
only a percentage of what we spend in fighting our multiple wars every year. It is a noble goal and I'm sure you would
appreciate this gift but I would raise some questions. I believe a guarantee of education though
high school is important for socialization of every young person. So our public schools are extremely
important and should be free. I view
collage as an investment in a career track.
People value greater and work harder if they need to pay for
something. We have trouble enough with
the party lifestyle of students in collage away from family, I suspect if we
made it free it could get even worse. I
remember being in collage and feeling that I was prolonging my adolescence as I
compared myself to my friends who were in the work world making money, even getting married and here I
was poor as a pauper studying in the library.
Collage education does not necessary open job opportunities to someone
so one needs to have a goal to pursue a collage degree. But clearly a collage education does open
doors that ordinarily would not be open to someone, so Bernie is right, young
people need to be encouraged to go collage.
The least we could do is have a given amount necessary for any public
collage as an interest fee loan promised for everyone who wants to go to
collage anywhere. Bernie's proposal
here scares me because I support our Church colleges. I wonder how they would survive if the State
supported collages were free.
Another huge issue has raised it's ugly head in this
campaign is an effort block immigration.
Strange that our Mexican neighbors have borne the brunt of this
criticism in a time when net immigration vs. emigration is currently near zero
from our southern neighbor. Most of our
current illegal immigrants come from Asia
where students stay longer than their student visas allow. However it has been our Spanish populations
which historically have swelled the ranks of our undocumented immigrants. We need to remember that our industries have
depended on labor from our southern neighbor for generations.
Our border was porous and people traveled back and forth freely as jobs
required. Families are made up with 2
or 3 children born in the states as US citizens and others born in Mexico. Spouses are often citizens of two different
countries. All of sudden immigration
became politically explosive, walls were built, work visas became almost
impossible to acquire, and green card requests denied beyond reason and families are caught, unable to visit relatives or unite families. You must know as an Asian refugee you have come to America with a golden
parachute. You have legal residency
from day one, with 3 months free rent, caseworker support, and a path to
citizenship. My own
ancestors were German who came to this English colony of Pennsylvania without documents. Ben Franklin wrote frequently of his
displeasure of these hordes of Germans coming to Pennsylvania who would change the culture of
his beloved colony. So since both of us
have immigrant past, myself as an child of illegal immigrants, and yourself as
a privileged refugee immigrant, I believe Jesus is watching how we respond to
others less privileged.
Ultimately our very society is dependent economically on our
immigrant base. Germany has
absorbed a million Syrian immigrants nobly, it's true. But more important is the fact that they needed them economically. Their populations has been aging just like
our congregation at Habecker Mennonite and they drastically need a labor
support going forward. One retirement
home executive told me he looking at a future of a growing population of older
people with drastic reduction in the labor force required to support his
community. The immigrant population
provides us with the most necessary support for our entire society. Here in Lancaster our houses are full, and our economy is thriving primarily because of first generation immigrants to our community. Those who oppose our national welcome toward our
immigrant communities are inviting our own financial demise. It is a socialistic principle that every
individual has equal dignity and respect.
As Christians we believe that God loves all people. We believe that when we show love and care
toward people of need whoever that may be, we demonstrate the love of God. God does not respect or see borders or legal
residency documents. He only sees human beings created in his likeness.
Climate change concern, energy conservation, environment
protection, renewal energy resources are all issues we support as people who
inhabit this planet called Earth. We
believe the planet is God's gift to us and we need to care for it. As an Asian you claim your heritage from Mongolia. Your ancient cousins were the first
people who called America
home. They had a saying, "The
great spirit is our Father, and the earth is our mother". I think they were saying the same thing we
want to say as Christians. This too is
a strong socialistic value.
Ultimately we need to remember, when one votes for
president of the United
States they are voting for the commander in
chief of the military. Presidents can
take our country to war. President
Obama promised to take us out of war in Iraq
and expand the war in Afghanistan. He did exactly what he said he would do, but Iraq
situation went into disarray with the rise of ISIS so now our war in Iraq is continuing into it's 14th
year. I voted for the first time in my
life when I voted for Obama. I believed
the Iraq
war was such a massive tragedy, I
registered as a democrat so I could vote for Obama against Hillary in the
primaries. Hillary has a record of
being quick to wage war, and I believed Obama needed to be rewarded for his
vote against waging war. However, war
continues to rage, and now we have this horrific problem of 60 million refugees
world wide. I can take comfort that
Obama has been a bit of a reluctant warrior
in that we are not fighting Russia
in Ukraine, nor did we
invade Syria
supporting Islamic groups against Assad as McCain wanted to.
So will I vote in the 2016 elections? If I have an opportunity to vote for Bernie
I will as an award for voting against the Iraq war as did Obama. Will I vote for Hillary in the general
election? Probably not. A funny thing happens to a person when one
votes for a person. Unconsciously their
decisions become your decisions.
Unconsciously you feel you need to defend your man because of your
vote. The same thing will happen to you
when you take the oath of allegiance to this country. You will start to defend your country in your thoughts
if not your words. It happens to every
soldier when they take their oath to live and die for their country. Allegiance to one's person or one's country can easily become an exercise of idolatry.
Hillary's track record for military intervention has not been good. She supported the war in Iraq. Democrats may speak for peace more
frequently but when it comes to waging war, both parties are equally quick to
use military force. We need to remember as Christians that our
King and highest allegiance is Jesus and not Caesar.